FX 5800 Ultra video.

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
just about any information on the 5800 is hard to find at this point, even on nvidia's site. however, you can see some shadermark benchs as well as a discussion about the 5800s performance here. as for your question about what ps2.0 games i play, that is compleatly irrelivent to the discussion. but sense you asked, prety much just halo at this point although i did get the new tomb raider free with my videocard and have been meaning to play though it eventualy.

You say PS 2.0 shaders in games you play are completely irrelevant yet you bring it up PS 2.0 shaders in 2 of your posts in this thread.

2nd post

the 5700ultra is actualy fast than the 5800utra in many of the shadermark tests. i don't think the drivers have changed much for the 5800s, it's just that the publics focus has been swayed from its weak points. it still has poor ps2.0 shader performace and aa and af are a bigger performace hit on all of nvidias cards, those were the the big complaints about the 5800 when it came out and the issues are the same today.

4th post

na the difference is nvidia is currently cheating on benchmarks and they claim they have no intention of stoping. furthermore, tests have shown that the 5800 falls behind the 5700 in many floating point shader operations. i know you don't want to hear it, but running the ps2.0 shaders at fx12 is the most likely explaination as to why the 5800 preforms so strongly in halo.



So which is it? Irrelevant or revelant? Or is it whenever it suits you....

 

[nRollo]

as for your question about what ps2.0 games i play, that is compleatly irrelivent to the discussion

I'd counter that PS2 performance is, and has been, irrelevant to any discussion of video cards. The only games that are currently DX9 PS2 are Halo, which runs better on nVidia, and TRAoD, which barely runs from what I've read. (hard to control, cracking textures, etc)

Like I said, I don't really doubt that the shader performance on the 5700U is better than the 5800U. On the other hand, I would say it's a totally moot point because the 5700Ultra is FAR too feeble to run PS2 anyway. Let's be honest: a 5950 can barely do it.

I think arguing that a 5700U has better shader performance so it's a better buy is about like saying a pellet gun has a better chance of killing a deer than a bb gun, so it's a better deer rifle buy. The point is you wouldn't use either as a deer rifle in the first place.

 

[kylebisme]

the fact that the 5800s is still not competitive in ps2.0 is revelant to the discussion of the chip's shortcomeings, which of the games i currently play that use ps2.0 does nothing to change this.

 

[kylebisme]

Rollo, that is like saying ps1.1 performance was irrelevant to for the geforce3. i got a geforce3 when it first came out and sure i didn't get to see much in games that made use of it for well over a year, but that doesn't change the fact i sure was glad i spent the few extra dollors on a geforce3 over a geforce2ultra when dx8 games finally started coming along.

 

[nRollo]

the fact that the 5800s is still not competitive in ps2.0 is revelant to the discussion of the chip's shortcomeings, which of the games i currently play that use ps2.0 does nothing to change this.

Does the fact that there really are no PS2 games make any difference in the 5800s lack of PS2 performance being a "shortcoming"? Or should it have played the PS2 games that don't exist over a year after it's release well, when they finally are released, well for the card to be a good value to you?

I'm starting to see why they call you the Snowman and I'm starting to wish you'd share.....

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
the fact that the 5800s is still not competitive in ps2.0 is revelant to the discussion of the chip's shortcomeings, which of the games i currently play that use ps2.0 does nothing to change this.

Trying to tell you that PS2.0 performance on ANY of todays (and yesterdays) cards is not important BECAUSE there are hardly any games Today that utilize PS 2.0 and those that do have it arent worth their salt. That is why you were posed with the question of what PS 2.0 games you own. Not a lot right? Halo and TRAOD. Compare that percentage against all the rest of the games you own. If you only own Halo and TRAOD, you are a 100% PS2.0 gamer. And thats only if These 2 games offer full time nothing but PS 2.0 ops.

 

[nRollo]

If I remember right, this whole thing started because I thought it interesting that Sneaky, with an inferior 5700U, was posting all kinds of smack about the 5800U, a far superior card to what he has.

Is there anyone here who would take the 5700Us better (but still pathetic and unusable) PS2 performance over a 5800U which can play anything OPENGL and DX8.1 way faster?

 

[kylebisme]

you make it sound like people are waiting for their radeons to become a good value, which is not the case by any means. my argument is not about waiting for the card to become a good value, it is about the card holding its value.

oh and my username has nothing to do with drugs.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Rollo
If I remember right, this whole thing started because I thought it interesting that Sneaky, with an inferior 5700U, was posting all kinds of smack about the 5800U, a far superior card to what he has.

Is there anyone here who would take the 5700Us better (but still pathetic and unusable) PS2 performance over a 5800U which can play anything OPENGL and DX8.1 way faster?

I think Rollo has a point here...

 

[nRollo]

you make it sound like people are waiting for their radeons to become a good value, which is not the case by any means. my argument is not about waiting for the card to become a good value, it is about the card holding its value.

Even so, your argument is wrong. The 5700U will not hold it's value with it's "better PS2 shader performance". The 5700U will be so pathetic and slow at full precision PS2 no one will dare use it for that.

Check out the PS2 performance:

http://www.tomshardware.com/business/20030911/half-life-01.html#directx_9_full_precision_performance
I know this is Tom's, but he's just reposting Valves Shady Day numbers.

Do you honestly want to argue that the "better FPS2" performance of a 5700U will make it hold it's value better than a 5800 Ultra when a 5900Ultra can only muster 30fps average at PS2?!

As for value, I notice no one has PM'd me with a "Rollo, I'll sell you my 5800U for $175" yet. So I can't buy a used 5800U for that, and I can buy lots of 5700Us brand new for that. I guess the guys that have 5800Us (how about it Punisher?) think they're worth more than 5700Us. I bet I can buy any used 5700U on the planet for $175.

 

[kylebisme]

considering the maket segments/prices sure a damper on that point though.

 

[kylebisme]

Rollo, i was never argueing that the 5800 was generaly worse than the 5700; i simply pointed out that it sometimes is. the 5800 and 5700 were never ment to be competion anyway, however nvidia did mess up bad with the 5800 when compared to what it was released to compeate against.

 

[SneakyStuff]

thank you! the short and sweet conclusion!

 

[modedepe]

Right..anyway, that video (you know, what this thread was originally about?) is pretty damn funny

Thanks for sharing it oldfart.

 

[dguy6789]

ok the 5800 ultra is better then 5700 ultra. now can someone please give me the funny cooling video

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I certainly wouldn't trade my 5800U for a 5700U. I agree it was a huge debacle of a premier but it has held it's value for me thanks to the price and drivers. I'll say it again, I have this card and play games with the eye candy turned on at least moderately and it provides a enjoyable gaming experience for me Isn't that what it's all about in the final analysis? Enjoying the games you play? I will enjoy things more when I get a Bigger, Nicer, 16ms or better LCD down the road a little that's for certain :beer:

 

[nRollo]

Dammit Punisher sell me that card! As Cartman would say,"Respect my auth-or-i-tay!" Sell me that card!

however nvidia did mess up bad with the 5800 when compared to what it was released to compeate against

The only thing nVidia failed with was the noisey reference fan, otherwise it competes quite well against the 9700Pro.

BTW- if you say it DOESN'T compete well with the 9700 Pro, please make note of any other card that came within 30% of either of them. Oh yeah, there weren't any.

 

[kylebisme]

nothing from nvidia compeated well with the 9700pro until the 5900 came around, and even then it looses bad in various situations and rarely does any better.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
nothing from nvidia compeated well with the 9700pro until the 5900 came around, and even then it looses bad in various situations and rarely does any better.

That's the truth when you put ATI in the game

 

[modedepe]

Originally posted by: Rollo

however nvidia did mess up bad with the 5800 when compared to what it was released to compeate against

The only thing nVidia failed with was the noisey reference fan, otherwise it competes quite well against the 9700Pro.

BTW- if you say it DOESN'T compete well with the 9700 Pro, please make note of any other card that came within 30% of either of them. Oh yeah, there weren't any.

There were a few more problems than just the fan. First nvidia chose to go with a 128 bit memory bus, which limited performance in some circumstances. To counter this they added the 1Ghz memory. This led to the problem with the fan, since additional cooling was needed because of such high clock rates. The other big problem the card had at launch was drivers. Remember the af of the fx series when it launched? It was pretty sub par. Also, the drivers had not been optimized, whereas the 9700 had been out long enough to have the driver optimized fairly well. Today the drivers have improved, which has helped the card out quite a bit and it does generally come close to the performance of the 9700.

Just out of curiousity, why did you sell your card for the 9800 Rollo?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
nothing from nvidia compeated well with the 9700pro until the 5900 came around, and even then it looses bad in various situations and rarely does any better.

Ok, now we know Snowmans in a little world of his own. I think we are done here.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

LOL! Hey Rollo, I'm trying to line another one up for $170 if the guy decides not to take it, I'll LYK if he bites :clock:

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
nothing from nvidia compeated well with the 9700pro until the 5900 came around, and even then it looses bad in various situations and rarely does any better.

Ok, now we know Snowmans in a little world of his own. I think we are done here.

ok, at low image quality settings the 5900 does do reasonably better, but i don't put much value on low-end settings for high-end cards.

 

[nRollo]

Just out of curiousity, why did you sell your card for the 9800 Rollo?

I was pissed off at nVidia. I had just spent $300 on the 5800 and they removed the link to it's spec from their website, and started bashing the card to the press. This was causing the value of the cards to plummet, so I sold it out of spite.

In retrospect, I wish I would have kept it. The 9800 Pro hasn't made that great of a difference in my life as I only play UT2003 lately anyway.

 

[nRollo]

ok, at low image quality settings the 5900 does do reasonably better, but i don't put much value on low-end settings for high-end cards

I'm starting to think all you do value is making off the wall, indefensible statements, and then making another when questioned on the first.

You've probably been pimping DX9 PS2 since the 9700 came out, and here we are, a year and a half later, with TRAoD the only game really using it. Must be pretty frustrating.